NAMA was just one part of what should have been a three part process

The FT’s editorial yesterday second leading article was entitled In Praise of NAMA. Their logic being that NAMA was the first element in what it proposes as a necessary three part process, that is to force the banks must come clean on their losses. But that it failed to take the second and third steps, ie make a political decision about who should carry those losses and to develop ‘the legal, technical and political capacity’ to impose those losses:

Nama did crystallise banks’ losses – insufficiently, but more than any other country. Dublin’s fatal mistake was failing to take the other two. Promising to make senior creditors whole was an undertaking Dublin could not afford even though it has indentured its citizens by trying. On the third step, it has dithered on implementing special insolvency legislation. In sum, Ireland tried to cross a chasm in one short jump. [Emphasis added]


Discover more from Slugger O'Toole

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

We are reader supported. Donate to keep Slugger lit!

For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.

Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger. While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.

If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.